https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781995 CESTAT Hyderabad held that the imported product, though described as "LPGbutane," is correctly classifiable as a mixture of propane and butane under heading 2711 1300, not as LPG under heading 2711 1900. The Tribunal noted that butane predominated up to 98% and that subsequent government notifications specifically extended exemptions to LPG, liquefied propane, liquefied butane, and their mixtures under different sub-headings, indicating distinct treatment. Consequently, the benefit of Sl. No. 75(E) of Customs Notification No. 21/2002 and Sl. No. 10 of Central Excise Notification No. 4/2005 was denied, and the appeal was dismissed. en-us Fri, 21 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 24 Nov 2025 08:57:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781995 CESTAT Hyderabad held that the imported product, though described as "LPGbutane," is correctly classifiable as a mixture of propane and butane under heading 2711 1300, not as LPG under heading 2711 1900. The Tribunal noted that butane predominated up to 98% and that subsequent government notifications specifically extended exemptions to LPG, liquefied propane, liquefied butane, and their mixtures under different sub-headings, indicating distinct treatment. Consequently, the benefit of Sl. No. 75(E) of Customs Notification No. 21/2002 and Sl. No. 10 of Central Excise Notification No. 4/2005 was denied, and the appeal was dismissed. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 21 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781995